This was sent to me... Penn & Teller, besides being great comedic magicians, often produce intriguing commentary videos.
Take a look at this one, for example...
Yes, it's an old joke that often makes it's way around the Net, but... these are real people.
Would you have signed (I hope not)? Do you know people who would (I'm sure)?
">
Friday, June 15, 2007
Thursday, June 14, 2007
A Creative Approach to Remind Whom We're Fighting
Michelle Malkin and her crew at Hot Air have put together an excellent video that captures eloquently the people we're fighting... and what they do and how they approach this war and our culture.
Take a look... watch the images and listen to the words... It's worth it. Here.
Take a look... watch the images and listen to the words... It's worth it. Here.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Celebrate Memorial Day
This has really begun to get under my skin. I'll be watching tv, and a commercial comes on asking us to help such-and-such a store to "Celebrate" Memorial Day.
What?
Just how do we "celebrate" Memorial Day? Memorial Day being the day where the country honors those who've died in service to the country's armed forces, what would be appropriate?
Perhaps we could throw a wild party?
Maybe drop a couple thousand dollars on the latest entertainment system?
What's a great way to celebrate?
I'm not quite sure how I am expected to revel in the deaths of fellow servicemen, past and present. Perhaps the sales managers could help explain it to me?
I know, let's ask the folks who've come up to me, no doubt meaning well, who have come up to me wishing me a "Happy Memorial Day!" I suppose we could go to the nearest cematary and blow party whistles and throw confetti?
If people today don't understand the concept of Memorial Day, then how are we to expect them to understand the concept of the sacrifices of our modern day Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coasties?
Just generally disgusted with where we've gone...
What?
Just how do we "celebrate" Memorial Day? Memorial Day being the day where the country honors those who've died in service to the country's armed forces, what would be appropriate?
Perhaps we could throw a wild party?
Maybe drop a couple thousand dollars on the latest entertainment system?
What's a great way to celebrate?
I'm not quite sure how I am expected to revel in the deaths of fellow servicemen, past and present. Perhaps the sales managers could help explain it to me?
I know, let's ask the folks who've come up to me, no doubt meaning well, who have come up to me wishing me a "Happy Memorial Day!" I suppose we could go to the nearest cematary and blow party whistles and throw confetti?
If people today don't understand the concept of Memorial Day, then how are we to expect them to understand the concept of the sacrifices of our modern day Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coasties?
Just generally disgusted with where we've gone...
Sunday, May 06, 2007
After the Goodbye
I was traveling this past weekend, and on my return, I came across a scene in the airport. It's a common scene that's played out in airports all around the country, and one that I'm painfully familiar with.
And sadly, it's likely one that the majority of people are (blissfully) unaware of.
I watched the whole scene, as it played out, from beginning to end. I recognized it, and was captivated, not so much by what was happening, but the surrounding action in the airport.
What was it?
I spotted a Soldier on his way back from his R&R. From reading his uniform, I could tell he's serving in Iraq. His wife was there, as they clung to every last second they could. Trying to avoid the inevitable.
She looked spectacular - having dressed well for this last time together. He was in his uniform. (Hint: Generally speaking, Soldiers travel in civilian clothes, so when you see one in uniform... odds are good they're enroute to/from the war zone. There are exceptions, but... odds are.)
Surrounding them was a boisterous crowd of folks going easily amongst their lives, unaware of the drama unfolding before them. Literally completely surrounding them, lives were going on, while theirs was coming back to a skidding halt. The two weeks of bliss in the midst of their (now) fifteen plus month hell having come down to the final minutes.
I recognized the emotions. They both were quiet, not saying much if anything at all. And then, the decision was made. It happens to all. Whether it's the urge to exert some control over something they have so little control over, or just the desire to stop putting off the inevitable, it's the same every time. Sometime before it's actually necessary to say goodbye, the couple suddenly stiffen up, share a last goodbye, a kiss, maybe a tight hug. And then, as this wife did, the spouse will exit. Quickly.
I watched her leave. She couldn't have walked any faster, any more deliberately, unless she'd broken out into a run.
And he... he went and sat down. I took the picture below. I was moved to take it as the contrast between the Soldier as his world has crashed down, and he's trying to transition his mind back to where he's going, and seal off the feelings from his R&R, and the crowd around him.
I admit, it's a poor quality picture. It was on my cell phone. But, if you look in the center, you'll see this Soldier.
This scene plays out very often, too often. I remember playing the part myself.
Just wanted to share something that happened in one corner of the world today.
And sadly, it's likely one that the majority of people are (blissfully) unaware of.
I watched the whole scene, as it played out, from beginning to end. I recognized it, and was captivated, not so much by what was happening, but the surrounding action in the airport.
What was it?
I spotted a Soldier on his way back from his R&R. From reading his uniform, I could tell he's serving in Iraq. His wife was there, as they clung to every last second they could. Trying to avoid the inevitable.
She looked spectacular - having dressed well for this last time together. He was in his uniform. (Hint: Generally speaking, Soldiers travel in civilian clothes, so when you see one in uniform... odds are good they're enroute to/from the war zone. There are exceptions, but... odds are.)
Surrounding them was a boisterous crowd of folks going easily amongst their lives, unaware of the drama unfolding before them. Literally completely surrounding them, lives were going on, while theirs was coming back to a skidding halt. The two weeks of bliss in the midst of their (now) fifteen plus month hell having come down to the final minutes.
I recognized the emotions. They both were quiet, not saying much if anything at all. And then, the decision was made. It happens to all. Whether it's the urge to exert some control over something they have so little control over, or just the desire to stop putting off the inevitable, it's the same every time. Sometime before it's actually necessary to say goodbye, the couple suddenly stiffen up, share a last goodbye, a kiss, maybe a tight hug. And then, as this wife did, the spouse will exit. Quickly.
I watched her leave. She couldn't have walked any faster, any more deliberately, unless she'd broken out into a run.
And he... he went and sat down. I took the picture below. I was moved to take it as the contrast between the Soldier as his world has crashed down, and he's trying to transition his mind back to where he's going, and seal off the feelings from his R&R, and the crowd around him.
I admit, it's a poor quality picture. It was on my cell phone. But, if you look in the center, you'll see this Soldier.
This scene plays out very often, too often. I remember playing the part myself.
Just wanted to share something that happened in one corner of the world today.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
What Sick !$@!
Did you see this in the news?
Probably not.
Some sick... there aren't even words to describe this person... poured sulfuric acid on the slide of a children's playground.
And when two year old Payton slid down the slide... through the acid... he of course began to cry uncontrollably. He suffered second- and third-degree burns to his body.
Shockingly, the police spokesman sounds like he's making excuses for the cretins who did this:
Apparently, the stars of society wanted to kick in the door of the school's storage area. To their amazement, there was a gold mine of industrial strength chemicals there. Having been raised to respect property not their own, they decided to pour some of the liquid onto the slide to see if the plastic would burn. When there was no reaction, they left it there. And later, Payton slid through it.
Amazing.
Probably not.
Some sick... there aren't even words to describe this person... poured sulfuric acid on the slide of a children's playground.
And when two year old Payton slid down the slide... through the acid... he of course began to cry uncontrollably. He suffered second- and third-degree burns to his body.
Shockingly, the police spokesman sounds like he's making excuses for the cretins who did this:
"We don't know that the suspects even knew what they were dealing with, whether they knew it was this caustic. They may have been burned themselves," said Cpl. Mike Hill.
Apparently, the stars of society wanted to kick in the door of the school's storage area. To their amazement, there was a gold mine of industrial strength chemicals there. Having been raised to respect property not their own, they decided to pour some of the liquid onto the slide to see if the plastic would burn. When there was no reaction, they left it there. And later, Payton slid through it.
Amazing.
Gun Control
From the AP:
Mayor Shot Dead
Apparently, in a mob hit, someone walked right up to the Mayor and shot him at point-blank range.
In Japan.
Where handguns are strictly banned.
(Caveat - yes, the murder rate with handguns is less there, but I attribute that to the culture difference.)
So, if we can just ban and confiscate all the handguns... there will be no more murders.
Right.
I post this as I saw on another blog someone commented that the idea of Gun Control is to ban all the guns, and then there will be no more deaths, like in Japan. Well, ironically, today... a Japanese Mayor was shot by a handgun.
Because CRIMINALS don't follow the laws ANYWAY!!!!
Mayor Shot Dead
Apparently, in a mob hit, someone walked right up to the Mayor and shot him at point-blank range.
In Japan.
Where handguns are strictly banned.
(Caveat - yes, the murder rate with handguns is less there, but I attribute that to the culture difference.)
So, if we can just ban and confiscate all the handguns... there will be no more murders.
Right.
I post this as I saw on another blog someone commented that the idea of Gun Control is to ban all the guns, and then there will be no more deaths, like in Japan. Well, ironically, today... a Japanese Mayor was shot by a handgun.
Because CRIMINALS don't follow the laws ANYWAY!!!!
With Support Like This
It's now after 15 April. And the money is getting tight, as the military is awaiting the supplemental appropriations bill to pass through the government.
The Army is Delaying Maintenance in order to ensure that the operating forces in Iraq and Afghanistan (and elsewhere) receive the money they need to meet mission.
Last thing we need to do is ensure all of the equipment is repaired and in working order.
Think the Democrats in Congress would mind supporting us just a little less? Because at this rate, their Supporting the Troops (But Not the Mission) will get people killed.
The Army is Delaying Maintenance in order to ensure that the operating forces in Iraq and Afghanistan (and elsewhere) receive the money they need to meet mission.
Last thing we need to do is ensure all of the equipment is repaired and in working order.
Think the Democrats in Congress would mind supporting us just a little less? Because at this rate, their Supporting the Troops (But Not the Mission) will get people killed.
I Mourn
Drug-Free Zones... aren't.
Smoke-Free Zones... aren't.
No-Wake Zones... nope.
Gun-Free Zones... sigh. Sadly, no.
In all cases, people violate the law. Laws have always been violated, thus the need for police.
The Massacre at Virginia Tech is a tragedy. It is a tragedy for the lives lost. I mourn for them. Young folks cut down in their prime. Dreams unfulfilled. The repercussions rippling throughout familes, friends, fellow students... the nation.
It is another tragedy. We have rendered ourselves meek. There are a few notable stories where people resisted.
I wonder what the story would have been like if one other person had had a gun. You know the headlines: "Hero Stops Mad Gunman." Part of our society cries out for gun control, yet when the example of an armed populace is demonstrated by a criminal being stopped... we all applaud.
Mr. Cho violated the Gun-Free Zone. He will not be punished, as he is dead. Those students who abided by the Gun-Free Zone were punished, with their deaths.
We remove from ourselves not just the ability, but the will to self-defend. That's the true insidious nature of such bans on guns. It's because, as a society, we are collectively giving over our defense, in toto, to someone else. We surrender before the first shot is fired.
And the ultimate fallacy is that a criminal will violate the law anyway, so the only ones affected by the bans are those who end up dead because they were disarmed.
And because we've removed our will to self-defend, we don't even try. Look around your office, your home... how many weapons do you see? (Those of you in the police or military, it's no fair counting your side-arms.) I count quite a few, without walking into the kitchen - which is a veritable bazaar of weapons - and I can imagine that if properly motivated, I could come up with a few more.
But we have removed the will to self-defend, and so we don't try so hard. A bullet in the back of Mr. Cho's skull would have done wonders. So would a fire extinguisher, lots of big heavy textbooks, desks, whatever. Not deriding those who died or were wounded... their loss is a tragedy.
I mourn. I mourn for all the loss. The senselessness of it all.
I mourn that there wasn't one more gun
Smoke-Free Zones... aren't.
No-Wake Zones... nope.
Gun-Free Zones... sigh. Sadly, no.
In all cases, people violate the law. Laws have always been violated, thus the need for police.
The Massacre at Virginia Tech is a tragedy. It is a tragedy for the lives lost. I mourn for them. Young folks cut down in their prime. Dreams unfulfilled. The repercussions rippling throughout familes, friends, fellow students... the nation.
It is another tragedy. We have rendered ourselves meek. There are a few notable stories where people resisted.
I wonder what the story would have been like if one other person had had a gun. You know the headlines: "Hero Stops Mad Gunman." Part of our society cries out for gun control, yet when the example of an armed populace is demonstrated by a criminal being stopped... we all applaud.
Mr. Cho violated the Gun-Free Zone. He will not be punished, as he is dead. Those students who abided by the Gun-Free Zone were punished, with their deaths.
We remove from ourselves not just the ability, but the will to self-defend. That's the true insidious nature of such bans on guns. It's because, as a society, we are collectively giving over our defense, in toto, to someone else. We surrender before the first shot is fired.
And the ultimate fallacy is that a criminal will violate the law anyway, so the only ones affected by the bans are those who end up dead because they were disarmed.
And because we've removed our will to self-defend, we don't even try. Look around your office, your home... how many weapons do you see? (Those of you in the police or military, it's no fair counting your side-arms.) I count quite a few, without walking into the kitchen - which is a veritable bazaar of weapons - and I can imagine that if properly motivated, I could come up with a few more.
But we have removed the will to self-defend, and so we don't try so hard. A bullet in the back of Mr. Cho's skull would have done wonders. So would a fire extinguisher, lots of big heavy textbooks, desks, whatever. Not deriding those who died or were wounded... their loss is a tragedy.
I mourn. I mourn for all the loss. The senselessness of it all.
I mourn that there wasn't one more gun
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Friday, April 13, 2007
Conspiracies Abound
A while back, a friend shared a book with me. It was Silent America by Bill Whittle. You may, or more likely may not, recognize him from his blogging at Eject!Eject!Eject!.
His latest post (H/T - Michelle Malkin) is incredibly well written (as is often true) and puts into words what has often frustrated me about conspiracy theorists. That to believe the conspiracy, you have to believe the absolute worst about everything and everyone... the worst about the country, the worst about those who serve it, and the worst about your fellow neighbors.
And what it takes to reach that point in your mind... is hard to understand.
Please, take a look at what Bill has to say. And if you'd like to read more of his, click the link to Amazon at the beginning of the post.
His latest post (H/T - Michelle Malkin) is incredibly well written (as is often true) and puts into words what has often frustrated me about conspiracy theorists. That to believe the conspiracy, you have to believe the absolute worst about everything and everyone... the worst about the country, the worst about those who serve it, and the worst about your fellow neighbors.
And what it takes to reach that point in your mind... is hard to understand.
Please, take a look at what Bill has to say. And if you'd like to read more of his, click the link to Amazon at the beginning of the post.
The Week In News
With nary a peep from some of the usual channels, I'd like to recommend that you take a look at this blog here. I was laughing uncontrollably. I've also added the embed below so you can view it here...
(H/T to Michelle Malkin.)
(H/T to Michelle Malkin.)
Sunday, April 08, 2007
Darfur
Today, in church, the pastor took a moment to include in his litany of areas of the world crying out for our help... Darfur.
It's a tragedy. It absolutely is. Over 400,000 are suspected of having died already.
The reason for this is, essentially, a conflict between the Janjaweed and various rebel groups. Most of those killed are caught in the cross-fire.
And there are quite a few calling for our involvement. They want us to fly in with our military strength and put a stop to the violence.
To end the civil war.
To place our troops in between two sides shooting each other.
In an area of the world with no national security significance to the United States.
But... wait. Aren't these the same concerns that are raised on why we should withdraw from Iraq? It's a civil war. Our troops are caught in a crossfire. Iraq has nothing to do with the United States.
(Freebie for radical leftists... Darfur doesn't even have oil.)
So, in all seriousness... why Darfur? It doesn't meet the requirements that the anti-war folks are stating for getting us out of Iraq.
It's a tragedy. It absolutely is. Over 400,000 are suspected of having died already.
The reason for this is, essentially, a conflict between the Janjaweed and various rebel groups. Most of those killed are caught in the cross-fire.
And there are quite a few calling for our involvement. They want us to fly in with our military strength and put a stop to the violence.
To end the civil war.
To place our troops in between two sides shooting each other.
In an area of the world with no national security significance to the United States.
But... wait. Aren't these the same concerns that are raised on why we should withdraw from Iraq? It's a civil war. Our troops are caught in a crossfire. Iraq has nothing to do with the United States.
(Freebie for radical leftists... Darfur doesn't even have oil.)
So, in all seriousness... why Darfur? It doesn't meet the requirements that the anti-war folks are stating for getting us out of Iraq.
What's the Brainstorming Session Like?
This is beyond the pale, but not completely surprising given some organizations' tendencies to protest through inappropirate means.
Many are familiar with the White House Easter Egg Roll. It's history goes back to the 1870's.
This is usually a joyous, happy time... children are invited onto the normally restrictive White House grounds and they have a great time.
Luckily, we have people in the country who can help us see those festivities through a more balanced view.
Take a look here.
Classy.
Nice touch.
I don't mind the message they're trying to get across - unexploded ordnance IS a problem. But, isn't there a better way?
I would love to sit in on the brainstorming sessions that eventually evolve into events like these. How do you get to the point where you take a festive children's activity and thrust the brutality of war into it? There's such a thing as time and place - the message can still be spread without ruining a wonderful childhood activity.
Shame.
Many are familiar with the White House Easter Egg Roll. It's history goes back to the 1870's.
This is usually a joyous, happy time... children are invited onto the normally restrictive White House grounds and they have a great time.
Luckily, we have people in the country who can help us see those festivities through a more balanced view.
Take a look here.
Classy.
Nice touch.
I don't mind the message they're trying to get across - unexploded ordnance IS a problem. But, isn't there a better way?
I would love to sit in on the brainstorming sessions that eventually evolve into events like these. How do you get to the point where you take a festive children's activity and thrust the brutality of war into it? There's such a thing as time and place - the message can still be spread without ruining a wonderful childhood activity.
Shame.
Saturday, April 07, 2007
Fred Thompson
Former Sen. Fred Thompson, and quite possibly a future presidential candidate, has posted a column over at RedState.com.
Take a peek. It's a good read.
Take a peek. It's a good read.
President Ahmadinejad the Proctologist
We were probed. As surely as a visit to a proctologist, the West was just probed by Iran.
What do I mean?
Iran, under President Ahmadinejad, is trying to achieve an ascendancy. As is classic and time-worn, when trouble brews domestically, focus the populace elsewhere.
President Ahmadinejad would like to achieve his goals of making Iran a super-state in the Middle East. Subduing, and quite possibly annexing, Iraq next door (not the same as our version of quelling the insurgency - his version of subduing means that the West is out of there). Giving Israel ample reason to wonder if there will be a tomorrow for the Jews. Restoring pride and power to Persia.
The West stands in his way. Much like Germany saw the the need to conquer Europe to consolidate control and to facilitate goals of a super-race, and Japan needed the United States pacified to free its access to natural resources for its empire, Iran (Persia) needs the West to back away.
Iran (Persia) could easily close off trade through the Straits of Hormuz. But, they know (or now, may only suspect) that quick military reaction would result. Thirty years of Western embargoes have affected their navy and air force, but luckily, they can still shop at Russia's flea markets, so they are not toothless.
What's important before waging war is having some idea of how your enemy may react. Will they fight back Will they stand by? Will they capitulate? How much fire is in their belly?
So, you probe. You test your enemy. See how they respond to low provocation.
And that's what Iran is doing. Between putting forces in Iraq - where they can formulate dissension AND closely observe Western forces - and the snatch and grab of British sailors and Marines... Iran is studying us.
And they're not disappointed. We have emboldened them with the latest reaction by the Brits. The culture in that part of the world respects strength. And allowing your uniformed personnel to be taken with, at most, stern talk, and quite likely prisoner trades and other rewards for your behavior, doesn't strike fear in the hearts for future operations.
"They" are coming.
Iran has not suddenly rolled over and realized thirty years of chanting "Death to the Great Satan" was a bad idea... they're just becoming more motivated and mobilized.
They are rejoicing in the weakness that is enveloping the West, as the United States' forces are stretched amazingly thin and hampered by strict rules of engagement and lackluster support at home, and its allies are few and far between. They have made sufficient economic inroads with a majority of the big players (Russia, China, Germany, France) to make them think twice about risking their money for a war or sanctions.
So, let's be prepared, and realize what's coming. President Ahmadinejad did not get a wild hare in his head just before Easter for nothing; you do NOT rise to his level in a country (any country, ours included) by being a complete idiot (sorry, liberals).
We were probed. We will be probed again. How will we react next time?
What do I mean?
Iran, under President Ahmadinejad, is trying to achieve an ascendancy. As is classic and time-worn, when trouble brews domestically, focus the populace elsewhere.
President Ahmadinejad would like to achieve his goals of making Iran a super-state in the Middle East. Subduing, and quite possibly annexing, Iraq next door (not the same as our version of quelling the insurgency - his version of subduing means that the West is out of there). Giving Israel ample reason to wonder if there will be a tomorrow for the Jews. Restoring pride and power to Persia.
The West stands in his way. Much like Germany saw the the need to conquer Europe to consolidate control and to facilitate goals of a super-race, and Japan needed the United States pacified to free its access to natural resources for its empire, Iran (Persia) needs the West to back away.
Iran (Persia) could easily close off trade through the Straits of Hormuz. But, they know (or now, may only suspect) that quick military reaction would result. Thirty years of Western embargoes have affected their navy and air force, but luckily, they can still shop at Russia's flea markets, so they are not toothless.
What's important before waging war is having some idea of how your enemy may react. Will they fight back Will they stand by? Will they capitulate? How much fire is in their belly?
So, you probe. You test your enemy. See how they respond to low provocation.
And that's what Iran is doing. Between putting forces in Iraq - where they can formulate dissension AND closely observe Western forces - and the snatch and grab of British sailors and Marines... Iran is studying us.
And they're not disappointed. We have emboldened them with the latest reaction by the Brits. The culture in that part of the world respects strength. And allowing your uniformed personnel to be taken with, at most, stern talk, and quite likely prisoner trades and other rewards for your behavior, doesn't strike fear in the hearts for future operations.
"They" are coming.
Iran has not suddenly rolled over and realized thirty years of chanting "Death to the Great Satan" was a bad idea... they're just becoming more motivated and mobilized.
They are rejoicing in the weakness that is enveloping the West, as the United States' forces are stretched amazingly thin and hampered by strict rules of engagement and lackluster support at home, and its allies are few and far between. They have made sufficient economic inroads with a majority of the big players (Russia, China, Germany, France) to make them think twice about risking their money for a war or sanctions.
So, let's be prepared, and realize what's coming. President Ahmadinejad did not get a wild hare in his head just before Easter for nothing; you do NOT rise to his level in a country (any country, ours included) by being a complete idiot (sorry, liberals).
We were probed. We will be probed again. How will we react next time?
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Questions for Her Majesty's Sailors
I've been quiet. Not wanting to say too much while the crisis was going on. But, they have now been released and are back in England.
I first raised some concerns in a chat with a friend last week. She seemed rather shocked by some of my questions and statements, but I tried to show her where I was coming from.
I was surprised about how this all started. Really, a foreign navy takes fifteen sailors and Marines prisoner (* - let's get the lingo right, too... they weren't hostages; what Iran did was an act of war, and thus, the fifteen were Prisoners...) and not a single defensive shot is fired?
Not one?
Iran shows up, says, "You are my prisoner", and the Brits shrug and say, "Ok"?
No one got on the radio and said, "Hey, Captain... there are some Iranians here trying to capture us..."? There's a big FRIGATE over there... surely force could have been brought to bear to protect those sailors.
I can't imagine the betrayal to find out that no one's got your back when another country comes up, points weapons at you, and takes you away.
Something else that bugged me about this... how quickly the Sailors "confessed". This was a big debate between my friend and I.
In the United States, we have the Code of Conduct. Memorized it in Basic training. It's posted everywhere, and we even carry it around with us.
Article 1 is very simply put, and eloquent. It reminds us of what our mission in the military is, and the stakes.
Article 2. This is what I'm talking about above. There were means to resist. The Sailors were armed. Plus, there was that FRIGATE nearby.
Article 3. The reason for this is clear. You don't cease being in the military when captured. You're expected to still resist. And one of the means to resist is to not accept any favors. Accepting such favors is one way that captors can make inroads and begin to "break" you and divide the group.
Article 4. Basically, I won't cooperate. Remember, as a prisoner, you do not have the whole picture. You're separated, and unable to remain a cohesive unit. You must "keep the faith". Each prisoner must do their part and take comfort that all other prisoners should be doing the same thing.
Article 5. Very simple. Keep your mouth shut. (But, SCEagle... what if they are tortured? Or holding a gun to their comrade? See Article 1 and Articles 3 and 4.) You do not have the big picture. And your statements, or "confessions", can easily circumscribe whatever efforts your nation is trying to accomplish.
Article 6. Don't lose faith. Don't lose faith in your God, and in your nation to get you back.
Sure, it's easy to sit here in the comfort of my home and pontificate. *I* wasn't captured. Didn't go through what we didn't see on Iranian TV.
Right.
Being in the military, one has to accept certain terms. Part of it is covered in Article 1. I am prepared to give my life. It doesn't say under what conditions... (Well, if my helicopter is shot down, sure... but, if I'm a prisoner, all bets are off... nope, that's not the way it goes.)
It's not easy... maybe they're threatening to remove fingers of your buddy? Or have one of those big knives held to your friend's neck? Maybe you're not prepared to watch your fellow comrade in arms get raped? Keep in mind, they also have Article 1. Everyone has to stay strong.
Imagine how this would have turned out if one of the sailors had been hurt? Can you imagine the President of Iran getting the word that one of the sailor's had been mutilated or killed? How do you say, "Oh $!@*" in Farsi? He would have realized that a line had been crossed (in addition to the MANY other lines already crossed, but this one would be big and bold) and Iran may soon have wrath raining down on it. No way to cover that up.
The first "confession" came very quickly. And supposedly, all fifteen confessed. Shame on them.
I hope that all of Her Majesty's armed forces are not as weak, though I fear they are. There have been so many cutbacks, and reductions... they're a shadow of what they once were. Note, it was United States Navy carriers that were doing exercises off the coast of Iran, not the Royal Navy.
Still surprised the HMS Cornwall didn't intervene and allowed her Sailors and Marines to be captured. Without a shot.
There are a lot of questions that need to be asked now that the prisoners are home. Judging by how quickly they gave in to the Iranians, we should have our answers by Monday.
I first raised some concerns in a chat with a friend last week. She seemed rather shocked by some of my questions and statements, but I tried to show her where I was coming from.
I was surprised about how this all started. Really, a foreign navy takes fifteen sailors and Marines prisoner (* - let's get the lingo right, too... they weren't hostages; what Iran did was an act of war, and thus, the fifteen were Prisoners...) and not a single defensive shot is fired?
Not one?
Iran shows up, says, "You are my prisoner", and the Brits shrug and say, "Ok"?
No one got on the radio and said, "Hey, Captain... there are some Iranians here trying to capture us..."? There's a big FRIGATE over there... surely force could have been brought to bear to protect those sailors.
I can't imagine the betrayal to find out that no one's got your back when another country comes up, points weapons at you, and takes you away.
Something else that bugged me about this... how quickly the Sailors "confessed". This was a big debate between my friend and I.
In the United States, we have the Code of Conduct. Memorized it in Basic training. It's posted everywhere, and we even carry it around with us.
Article I
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
Article II
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.
Article III
If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.
Article IV
Should I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information nor take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.
Article V
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.
Article VI
I will never forget that I am an American fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.
Article 1 is very simply put, and eloquent. It reminds us of what our mission in the military is, and the stakes.
Article 2. This is what I'm talking about above. There were means to resist. The Sailors were armed. Plus, there was that FRIGATE nearby.
Article 3. The reason for this is clear. You don't cease being in the military when captured. You're expected to still resist. And one of the means to resist is to not accept any favors. Accepting such favors is one way that captors can make inroads and begin to "break" you and divide the group.
Article 4. Basically, I won't cooperate. Remember, as a prisoner, you do not have the whole picture. You're separated, and unable to remain a cohesive unit. You must "keep the faith". Each prisoner must do their part and take comfort that all other prisoners should be doing the same thing.
Article 5. Very simple. Keep your mouth shut. (But, SCEagle... what if they are tortured? Or holding a gun to their comrade? See Article 1 and Articles 3 and 4.) You do not have the big picture. And your statements, or "confessions", can easily circumscribe whatever efforts your nation is trying to accomplish.
Article 6. Don't lose faith. Don't lose faith in your God, and in your nation to get you back.
Sure, it's easy to sit here in the comfort of my home and pontificate. *I* wasn't captured. Didn't go through what we didn't see on Iranian TV.
Right.
Being in the military, one has to accept certain terms. Part of it is covered in Article 1. I am prepared to give my life. It doesn't say under what conditions... (Well, if my helicopter is shot down, sure... but, if I'm a prisoner, all bets are off... nope, that's not the way it goes.)
It's not easy... maybe they're threatening to remove fingers of your buddy? Or have one of those big knives held to your friend's neck? Maybe you're not prepared to watch your fellow comrade in arms get raped? Keep in mind, they also have Article 1. Everyone has to stay strong.
Imagine how this would have turned out if one of the sailors had been hurt? Can you imagine the President of Iran getting the word that one of the sailor's had been mutilated or killed? How do you say, "Oh $!@*" in Farsi? He would have realized that a line had been crossed (in addition to the MANY other lines already crossed, but this one would be big and bold) and Iran may soon have wrath raining down on it. No way to cover that up.
The first "confession" came very quickly. And supposedly, all fifteen confessed. Shame on them.
I hope that all of Her Majesty's armed forces are not as weak, though I fear they are. There have been so many cutbacks, and reductions... they're a shadow of what they once were. Note, it was United States Navy carriers that were doing exercises off the coast of Iran, not the Royal Navy.
Still surprised the HMS Cornwall didn't intervene and allowed her Sailors and Marines to be captured. Without a shot.
There are a lot of questions that need to be asked now that the prisoners are home. Judging by how quickly they gave in to the Iranians, we should have our answers by Monday.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Free Bi-Annual Vacation to Middle East
It seems there's a memorandum put out by the Staff Director of the House Armed Services Committee. The "Global War on Terror" may no longer be referred to as such, according to language on page 11.
Now, I've read it. And I understand the purpose of a "style guide". I don't truly believe there's a nefarious element here.
However, I can't resist one little jab.
So, if there were a reference to one of those nice and pretty ribbons the Army handed out by the bajillions, would it be okay to still call it the "Global War on Terrorism Service Medal" (or Expeditionary Medal, as the case may be)? Or, will it be like the BINGO song from our youth...
(clap)(clap)(clap)(clap) Service Medal...
(clap)(clap)(clap)(clap) Service Medal...
(clap)(clap)(clap)(clap) Service Medal...
and Medal was it's Name-o...
Now, I've read it. And I understand the purpose of a "style guide". I don't truly believe there's a nefarious element here.
However, I can't resist one little jab.
So, if there were a reference to one of those nice and pretty ribbons the Army handed out by the bajillions, would it be okay to still call it the "Global War on Terrorism Service Medal" (or Expeditionary Medal, as the case may be)? Or, will it be like the BINGO song from our youth...
(clap)(clap)(clap)(clap) Service Medal...
(clap)(clap)(clap)(clap) Service Medal...
(clap)(clap)(clap)(clap) Service Medal...
and Medal was it's Name-o...
Sunday, April 01, 2007
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Government Health Care
Talk to anyone who is a vict..., er um... user, of the government's free health care, be it VA, military, local clinic... what have you.
You'll hear all kinds of stories - usually about how long the wait is, or you can't get seen, or you have schedule appointments months later just to be seen (frequent occurance to me).
And it occurs to me.
All Pro-Life advocates (aka, anti-abortion) should immediately contact their representatives to enact national socialized medicine.
Why?
Because, in that world, the waiting list for an abortion will be at least 10-12 months.
Passing thought.
You'll hear all kinds of stories - usually about how long the wait is, or you can't get seen, or you have schedule appointments months later just to be seen (frequent occurance to me).
And it occurs to me.
All Pro-Life advocates (aka, anti-abortion) should immediately contact their representatives to enact national socialized medicine.
Why?
Because, in that world, the waiting list for an abortion will be at least 10-12 months.
Passing thought.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Pointless Maneuvering
I would be negligent if I didn't comment (again) on the Iraq Supplemental vote.
Both the House and the Senate have now passed, albeit just barely, their own versions of the bill. Two notable qualities of the bills - they both set a deadline for our surrender and they fund more than the military needs, although Popeye does love his spinach.
What stood out today was the Honorable Rep. Pelosi's comments to the President (side-note: some of you may notice that one of the features of my posts is that I will ALWAYS use respect to those in their various positions, personal feelings aside. I feel it's lacking in today's discourse, and that lack is hindering debate. Compare with other blogs - you know where...).
Oh really. She wants respect. And, she wants the Commander-in-Chief to respect Congress' Constitutional role (please, show me where, Madame Speaker) in restricting the military conduct of our military.
Respect.
Wow.
The Democrats are insisting on pursuing a piece of legislation that is doomed to a veto, and is not veto-proof. For what purpose?
Why is the Democrat leadership going to the mat for this?
The naive view would be that the House would do two bills, one to fund the military, and then one bill, perhaps a very short one, saying that the Congress is curtailing the Commander-in-Chief's authority to deploy troops to Iraq. That way, the troops get their funding (see: "We Support the Troops") AND they get a very clean, no manipulation, vote.
But, that's not happening here. There's all kinds of bait, bribes, pork laden into this bill. If the principle were so clear, and from what I read in the MSM, and hear from the Democrats, there is a loud hue and cry from the American people demanding the Democrats take action (and to think, it's almost April... I'm glad it's something important.)
So, with 18 days remaining before the military starts running out of funds, according to a projection by the Defense chiefs... the money is tied up in political game-playing.
And Rep. Pelosi wants respect.
Madame Speaker, will that respect come when the military must begin curtailing training flying hours for its pilots? Or, will it be when deploying units can't practice live fire ranges because there's an ammunition shortage, and the troops downrange need the bullets? Maybe we'll respect you more when the fitness centers, family centers, Yellow Ribbon Rooms, and other MWR facilities are forced to reduce their hours due to lack of funds?
Speaker Pelosi does have a response to the concern about the military running out of money:
'It's only a few weeks.' (For a Congress that historically has never been known for it's speed.) My favorite: 'Leadership would have required for him to have anticipated these needs.' Madame Speaker, earlier you were quoted referring to your Constitutional roles. In the quote, you mistakenly alluded to a role governing the military. Here, you again make a Constitutional mistake. You say the President had the Leadership responsibility to authorize the funding. How? In the Constitution, Article 1, Section 7, paragraph 1, "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives...".
Madame Speaker, the President has no Constitutional role to introduce a spending bill in the US House. Exactly how would you have preferred he demonstrate the leadership you felt he lacked?
In short, today Congress failed the troops. They announced our willingness to surrender, or run away within a set period of time, to our enemy. They announced that the Congress no longer supports the mission. And, I'm sure that message was not lost upon the enemy - either our known enemy now, or future enemies we haven't met yet.
Finally, I'd like to share where some other folks have posted their views.
Tanker Brothers
Both the House and the Senate have now passed, albeit just barely, their own versions of the bill. Two notable qualities of the bills - they both set a deadline for our surrender and they fund more than the military needs, although Popeye does love his spinach.
What stood out today was the Honorable Rep. Pelosi's comments to the President (side-note: some of you may notice that one of the features of my posts is that I will ALWAYS use respect to those in their various positions, personal feelings aside. I feel it's lacking in today's discourse, and that lack is hindering debate. Compare with other blogs - you know where...).
"On this very important matter, I would extend a hand of friendship to the president, just say to him, 'Calm down with the threats, there's a new Congress in town. We respect your constitutional role. We want you to respect ours.' This war must end. The American people have lost faith in the president's conduct of the war. Let's see how we can work together."
"I just wish the president would take a deep breath, recognize again that we each have our constitutional role and we should respect that in terms of each other."
Oh really. She wants respect. And, she wants the Commander-in-Chief to respect Congress' Constitutional role (please, show me where, Madame Speaker) in restricting the military conduct of our military.
Respect.
Wow.
The Democrats are insisting on pursuing a piece of legislation that is doomed to a veto, and is not veto-proof. For what purpose?
Why is the Democrat leadership going to the mat for this?
The naive view would be that the House would do two bills, one to fund the military, and then one bill, perhaps a very short one, saying that the Congress is curtailing the Commander-in-Chief's authority to deploy troops to Iraq. That way, the troops get their funding (see: "We Support the Troops") AND they get a very clean, no manipulation, vote.
But, that's not happening here. There's all kinds of bait, bribes, pork laden into this bill. If the principle were so clear, and from what I read in the MSM, and hear from the Democrats, there is a loud hue and cry from the American people demanding the Democrats take action (and to think, it's almost April... I'm glad it's something important.)
So, with 18 days remaining before the military starts running out of funds, according to a projection by the Defense chiefs... the money is tied up in political game-playing.
And Rep. Pelosi wants respect.
Madame Speaker, will that respect come when the military must begin curtailing training flying hours for its pilots? Or, will it be when deploying units can't practice live fire ranges because there's an ammunition shortage, and the troops downrange need the bullets? Maybe we'll respect you more when the fitness centers, family centers, Yellow Ribbon Rooms, and other MWR facilities are forced to reduce their hours due to lack of funds?
Speaker Pelosi does have a response to the concern about the military running out of money:
"The fact is the president of United States as the Commander-In-Chief has weakened our military. Why would he be saying to us we're running out of money when it's only a few weeks. Leadership would have required for him to have anticipated these needs."
'It's only a few weeks.' (For a Congress that historically has never been known for it's speed.) My favorite: 'Leadership would have required for him to have anticipated these needs.' Madame Speaker, earlier you were quoted referring to your Constitutional roles. In the quote, you mistakenly alluded to a role governing the military. Here, you again make a Constitutional mistake. You say the President had the Leadership responsibility to authorize the funding. How? In the Constitution, Article 1, Section 7, paragraph 1, "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives...".
Madame Speaker, the President has no Constitutional role to introduce a spending bill in the US House. Exactly how would you have preferred he demonstrate the leadership you felt he lacked?
In short, today Congress failed the troops. They announced our willingness to surrender, or run away within a set period of time, to our enemy. They announced that the Congress no longer supports the mission. And, I'm sure that message was not lost upon the enemy - either our known enemy now, or future enemies we haven't met yet.
Finally, I'd like to share where some other folks have posted their views.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
